Selling original CDs after ripping them to mp3
Larry
I just ripped my CD collection to mp3 files and I was planning to pack up
the original CDs and put them in storage or similar. Would it be legal to
sell them instead (I don't really need them anymore)? If not, could I give
them away and still legally keep and use the mp3s I ripped? If still not,
could I throw them away (which I would hate to do) and still legally keep
the mp3s?
Thanks,
Larry
Kent Wills
"Larry" <nob...@dev.null> wrote in message
news:138d907...@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi,
I'm not a lawyer. If anyone who is contradicts anything I write, go
with their opinion over mine.
My understanding is that you can make a single archival copy of a given
copyrighted item. However, you have to treat it as if it didn't really
exist. By this I mean that if you have on CD and loan it to a frend to
listen to, you can't sit at home and listen to it at the same time (unless
s/he has a really powerful sound system <g>).
As such, you can't sell nor give away your CDs and still be able to
listen to the MP3s without violating copyright law.
I think storage would be the best way to go. Not only do you not need to
worry about copyright law, but if something should happen and you lose the
MP3s, you can rip the CDs again.
This is why I copy the movie portion of my DVDs and keep the DVDs. If I
ruin the copy, no biggie. I can make another copy from the unharmed
original.
--
Kent
Children seldom misquote you. In fact, they usually repeat word for word
what you shouldn't have said.
tjab
This is not legal advice but I would not throw away or sell the originals,
as they are likely of much higher quality than the MP3s.
Lee Hollaar
>
>"Larry" <nob...@dev.null> wrote in message
>news:138d907...@corp.supernews.com...
>> Hi,
>
> I'm not a lawyer. If anyone who is contradicts anything I write, go
>with their opinion over mine.
>
>>
>> I just ripped my CD collection to mp3 files and I was planning to pack up
>> the original CDs and put them in storage or similar. Would it be legal to
>> sell them instead (I don't really need them anymore)? If not, could I
>give
>> them away and still legally keep and use the mp3s I ripped? If still not,
>> could I throw them away (which I would hate to do) and still legally keep
>> the mp3s?
>>
>
> My understanding is that you can make a single archival copy of a given
>copyrighted item.
There is no such rule in United States copyright law. There is a special
rule that allows one to make archival programs of "computer programs"
but you have to dispose of all copies made under the rule when you
dispose of the original. (See 17 U.S.C. 117.)
You infringed the copyright owner's exclusive right of reproduction when
you ripped the CDs. You do get to dispose of the original CDs any way
you want, since they are lawfully-made copies. (See 17 U.S.C. 109.)
But the MP3s you are left with are infringing copies, whether or not
you continue to have the original CDs.
Perhaps you could make a "fair use" argument for the legality of the
MP3s. (See 17 U.S.C. 107.) That argument would be easier to make as
long as you retained the CDs, and difficult to make if you sold them,
since a key factor in determining fair use is the effect on the market.
richard
It's your property. You can sell it as you like. Same thing as selling
a copyrighted book.
What you can't do is sell the copies that you ripped.
Well you could but don't get caught doing it or the assholes behind
the RAAI will probably threaten you with a few nasty phone calls and
court appearances.
Have you ever been asked by anyone where and when you purchased that
CD? Hey buddy, you got the receipt for that thing? Shit no man,
Trashed it 2 years ago. So what are they gonna do about it? The artist
already made his guaranteed income from the original sale. And that,
is the only issue they can legally enforce.
Larry
Larry
"tjab" <tj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:f66bjo$a...@rac1.wam.umd.edu...
Larry
about, unless selling the ripped CDs. But I just wanted to know what is
legal strictly spoken.
Thanks for all the replies.
Larry
"richard" <lordof...@royal.net> wrote in message
news:1183251090.7...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Raven...@gmail.com
> --
> Kent
> Children seldom misquote you. In fact, they usually repeat word for word
> what you shouldn't have said.
Kent:
Just had to say, LOVE your quote!
Raven
Raven...@gmail.com
you cannot sell a ripped version of a CD, therein lies the piracy, yes/
no?
Lee Hollaar
There is no specific exception in United States copyright law that permits
ripping a CD. That would infringe the reproduction right.
That said, it may be possible that it would be a "fair use," but that
requires analyzing the specific facts under the four factors given
in 17 U.S.C. 107.
Selling a copy that is not legally made would be a separate infringement,
under the distribution right. The "first sale" exception only applies
to legally-made copies.
Raven...@gmail.com
> In article <1183411695.607354.68...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> "RavenHo...@gmail.com" <RavenHo...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >I was under the impression that you could rip it and then sell it, but
> >you cannot sell a ripped version of a CD, therein lies the piracy, yes/
> >no?
>
> There is no specific exception in United States copyright law that permits
> ripping a CD. That would infringe the reproduction right.
>
> That said, it may be possible that it would be a "fair use," but that
> requires analyzing the specific facts under the four factors given
> in 17 U.S.C. 107.
>
> Selling a copy that is not legally made would be a separate infringement,
> under the distribution right. The "first sale" exception only applies
> to legally-made copies.
hmmmmmm thank you for that information - now what do I do with all of
the VHS tapes, the records and CD's that I had for my yardsale?
LOL.......::: wink......
I guess there's always the public library and the donation receipt for
taxes!
m...@privacy.net
Arius. (Miracles under Diocletian and under Arius.)
833. Miracle.--The people concluded this of themselves; but if the reason of
it must be given to you...
It is unfortunate to be in exception to the rule. The same must be strict,
and opposed to exception. But yet, as it is certain that there are
exceptions to a rule, our judgment must though strict, be just.
834. John 6:26: Non quia vidisti signum, sed quia saturati estis.188
Those who follow Jesus Christ because of His miracles honour His power in
all the miracles which it produces. But those who, making profession to
follow Him because of His miracles, follow Him in fact only because He
comforts them and satisfies them with worldly blessings, discredit His
miracles, when they are opposed to their own comforts.
John 9: Non est hic homo a Deo, quia sabbatum non custodit. Alii: Quomodo
potest homo peccator haec signa facere?189
Which is the most clear?
This house is not of God; for they do not there believe that the five
propositions are in Jansenius. Others: This house is of God; for in it there
are wrought strange miracles.
Which is the most clear?
Tu quid dicis? Dico quia propheta est. Nisi esset hic a Deo, non poterat
facere quidquam.[190]
835. In the Old Testament, when they will turn you from God. In the New,
when they will turn you from Jesus Christ. These are the occasions for
excluding particular miracles from belief. No others need be excluded.
Does it, therefore, follow that they would have the right to exclude all the
prophe
Larry
art indeed well off, slave. Thy master favours thee; he will soon beat thee.
210. The last act is tragic, however happy all the rest of the play is; at
the last a little earth is thrown upon our head, and that is the end for
ever.
211. We are fools to depend upon the society of our fellow-men. Wretched as
we are, powerless as we are, they will not aid us; we shall die alone. We
should therefore act as if we were alone, and in that case should we build
fine houses, etc. We should seek the truth without hesitation; and, if we
refuse it, we show that we value the esteem of men more than the search for
truth.
212. Instability.--It is a horrible thing to feel all that we possess
slipping away.
213. Between us and heaven or hell there is only life, which is the frailest
thing in the world.
214. Injustice.--That presumption should be joined to meanness is extreme
injustice.
215. To fear death without danger, and not in danger, for one must be a man.
216. Sudden death alone is feared; hence confessors stay with lords.
217. An heir finds the title-deeds of his house. Will he say, "Perhaps they
are forged" and neglect to examine them?
218. Dungeon.--I approve of not examining the opinion of Copernicus; but
this...! It concerns all our life to know whether the soul be mortal or
immortal.
219. It is certain that the mortality or immortality of the soul must make
an entire difference to morality. And yet philosophers have constructed
their ethics independently of this: they discuss to pass an hour.
Plato, to incline to Christianity.
220. The fallacy of philosophers who have not discussed the immortality of
the soul. The fallacy of their dilemma in Montaigne.
221. Atheists ought to say what is perfectly evident; now it is not
perfectly evident that the soul is material.
222. Atheists.--What reason have they for saying that w
richard
abroad or upset, according to the meaning. (The argument by force of M. le
Maitre over the friar.)
54. Miscellaneous.--A form of speech, "I should have liked to apply myself
to that."
55. The aperitive virtue of a key, the attractive virtue of a hook.
56. To guess: "The part that I take in your trouble." The Cardinal did not
want to be guessed.
"My mind is disquieted." I am disquieted is better.
57. I always feel uncomfortable under such compliments as these: "I have
given you a great deal of trouble," "I am afraid I am boring you," "I fear
this is too long." We either carry our audience with us, or irritate them.
58. You are ungraceful: "Excuse me, pray." Without that excuse I would not
have known there was anything amiss. "With reverence be it spoken..." The
only thing bad is their excuse.
59. "To extinguish the torch of sedition"; too luxuriant. "The restlessness
of his genius"; two superfluous grand words.
SECTION II: THE MISERY OF MAN WITHOUT GOD
60. First part: Misery of man without God.
Second part: Happiness of man with God.
Or, First part: That nature is corrupt. Proved by nature itself.
Second part: That there is a Redeemer. Proved by Scripture.
61. Order.--I might well have taken this discourse in an order like this: to
show the vanity of all conditions of men, to show the vanity of ordinary
lives, and then the vanity of philosophic lives, sceptics, stoics; but